Yesterday Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman did what just a couple of years ago would have resulted in his being rolled into a rug and thrown off a bridge (politically!): he broke party orthodoxy and announced his support for same sex marriage. Now the only Republican senator to back gay marriage, Portman is just the latest politician to decide that far from being an unmitigated disaster for all of humanity, gay marriage not only OK, but excellent.

To borrow a phrase from the spokesman for the group, Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry, which includes daughters of John Huntsman (against gay marriage before he was for it) and John McCain (who cares?), these men and women are "completing their own journeys on marriage for same-sex couples." These journeys have been filled with thrills and chills, bias, black comedy, and craven political calculation. (All this may have something to do with the fact that America went from 27 percent support for gay marriage in 1996 to 50 percent today, but let's not harsh the mellow.)

Here are some of the better journeys.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH)

Before: Voted for the defense of marriage act in 1996.

Why: "Rob believes marriage is a sacred bond between one man and one woman," a spokesman told The Cincinnati Enquirer.

Now: The only Republican senator to support gay marriage.

Why: Gay son. "I have come to believe that if two people are prepared to make a lifetime commitment to love and care for each other in good times and bad, the government shouldn't deny them the opportunity to get married." (Also: Discovered decency.)

Barack Obama (D-president)

Before: Maintained support forcivil unions but not gay marriage in a 14-year masterwork of Clintonian evasion and expediency.

Why? Um, because he was a black guy trying to get elected president and he needed to convince people that he wasn't a dangerous Islamo-Kenyan radical bent on taking the children of middle Americans, turning them gay, and forming them into a night army that steals guns and crosses?

And then: Eh, began warming to it.

Why? "I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage. But … attitudes evolve, including mine."

Now: As of last May, fully on board.

Why? It's now a fight he can win. Also, his daughters' friends have gay parents, and "frankly, that's the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective."

Steney Hoyer (D–Maryland)

Before: Voted for Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.

Why? Thought civil unions would do the trick.

After that: Opposed the 2004 federal gay marriage ban, mostly on constitutional grounds, arguing that it would violate the separation of powers, but also more quietly suggested the ban was "based in intolerance and divisiveness."

Why? "I have, throughout my career, thought we should treat people equally," he said in October. "Like the president, I evolved into thinking marriage had a broader meaning."

Bill Clinton (D - Former president)

Before:Signed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, saying, "Marriage is an institution for the union of a man and a woman. This has been my longstanding position, and it is not being reviewed or considered."

Why? It's the conservative way.Wrote last month that, "There is nothing conservative about denying other Americans the ability to forge that same relationship with the person they love."

Dick Cheney (R - Former vice president)

Before: Ran on a bitterly anti-gay ticket, supporting the leading proponent of a federal gay marriage ban.

Why? Speaking out "probably would have sunk President George W. Bush's prospects for office."

And then: Quietly supported gay marriage.

Why? Daughter is gay.

Anything else? During the VP debate in 2004, after Cheney dodged a question about gay marriage, John Edwards, who himself opposed gay marriage, tried to bait the Veep: "I think the vice president and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very much." The Veep would not be baited. Afterwards,Cheney's daughter called Edwards "total slime."